Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial analysis of anthropogenic disturbances in mangrove forests of Bhitarkanika Conservation Area, India

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The dependence of coastal communities on mangrove forests for direct consumptive use due to the scarcity of alternate resources makes them one of the highly disturbed landscapes. This paper examines the spatial characteristics and extent of anthropogenic disturbances affecting the mangrove forests of Bhitarkanika Conservation Area situated along the east coast of India by using remotely sensed data and GIS, supplemented with socioeconomic surveys. The study reveals that resource extractions from these forests were considerable despite the protected status. Around 14% of the total fuel wood consumed annually in each of the household came from the mangrove forests of the Park. The patterns of consumption were spatially heterogeneous, controlled by the availability of alternatives, ease of accessibility, presence of markets, human density, and forest composition. The disturbance surface showed 30% of the major forest classes to be under high to very high levels of disturbance especially at easy access points. Besides, the distribution of economically useful species also determined the degree of disturbance. Resource use surfaces clearly identified the biotic pressure zones with respect to specific mangrove use and could be combined with the disturbance regime map to prioritize areas for mangrove restoration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdullah SA and Nakagoshi N (2007) Forest fragmentation and its correlation to human land use change in the state of Selangor, peninsular Malaysia. Forest Ecology and Management 241(1–3): 39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badola R (2000) Local people amidst the changing conservation ethos: Relationships between People and Protected Areas in India. In: Decentralization and Devolution of Forest Management in Asia and the Pacific, eds., T., Enters, P.B., Drust and M., Victor, Bangkok: RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1

    Google Scholar 

  • Badola R and Hussain SA (2003) Valuation of Bhitarkanika Mangrove Ecosystem for Ecological Security and Sustainable Resource Use. Study Report, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Badola R and Hussain SA (2005) Valuing the storm protection function of Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem, India. Environmental Conservation 32(1): 85–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee LK (1984) Vegetation of Bhitarkanika Sanctuary in Cuttack district, Orissa, India. Indian Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany 5(5): 1065–1079

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbier EB (2006) Natural barriers to natural disasters: replanting mangroves after the tsunami. Front Ecol Environ 4(3): 124–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beland M, Goita K, Bonn F and Pham TTH (2006) Assessment of land-cover changes related to shrimp aquaculture using remote sensing data: a case study in the Giao Thuy District, Vietnam. Int J Remote Sens 27(8): 1491–1510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blasco F, Aizpuru M and Gers C (2001) Depletion of the mangroves of continental Asia. Wetlands Ecology and Management 9(3): 245–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosius P (2004) Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas at the World Parks Congress. Conservation Biology. 18(3): 609–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrough P and McDonnell R (1998) Principles of Geographical Information Systems. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Chadha S and Kar CS (1999) Bhitarkanika, Myth and Reality. Nataraj Publishers, Dehra Dun, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Champion HG and Seth SK (1968) A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India. Government of India Press, New Delhi,India

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen R and Twilley RR (1998) A gap dynamic model of mangrove forest development along gradients of soil salinity and nutrient resources. Journal of Ecology 86(1): 37–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen MCL and Lara RJ (2003) Temporal changes of mangroves vegetation boundaries in Amazonia: application of GIS and remote sensing techniques.Wetl Ecol Manage 11(4): 223–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen WB, Spies TA, Alig RJ, Oetter DR, Maiersperger TK and Fiorella M (2002) Characterizing 23 years (1972–1995) of stand replacement disturbance in western Oregon forests with Landsat imagery Ecosystems 5(2): 122–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couturier S, Gastellu-Etchegorry JP, Patino P and Martin E (2009) A model-based performance test for forest classifiers on remote sensing imagery. Forest Ecology and Management 257(1): 23–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahdouh-Guebas F and Koedam N (2008) Long term retrospection on mangrove development using transdisciplinary approaches: A review. Aquatic Botany 89(2): 80–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewel KC, Twilley RR and Ong JE (1998a) Different kinds of mangrove forests provide different goods and services. Global Ecol Biogeogr 7: 83–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewel KC, Zheng S, Pinzon ZS and Bourgeois JA (1998) Environmental effects of canopy gap formation in high rainfall mangrove forests. Biotropica 30(4): 510–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farnsworth EJ and Ellison AM (1997) The global conservation status of mangroves. Ambio 26(6): 328–334

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromard F, Vega C and Proisy C (2004) Half a century of dynamic coastal change affecting mangrove shorelines of French Guiana: a case study based on remote sensing data analyses and field surveys. Mar Geol 208(2–4): 265–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gammage S (1997) Estimating the returns to mangrove conversion: sustainable management or short-term gain. Discussion Paper (DP97-02), presented at a workshop on Mechanisms for Financing Wise Use of Wetlands Dakar, Senegal 13 November 1998, pp. 81

  • Hambrey J (1996) Comparative economics of landuse options in mangroves. Aquaculture Asia 1(2): 10–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy CC, Schmidt KM, Menakis JP, Samson RN (2001) Spatial data for national fire planning and fuel management. International Journal of Wildland Fire 10(3/4): 353–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemstrom MA, Korol JJ and Hann WJ (2001) Trends in terrestrial plant communities and landscape health indicate the effects of alternative management strategies in the interior Columbia River basin. Forest Ecology and Manage 153(12): 105–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain SA and Badola R (2008) Valuing mangrove ecosystem services: linking nutrient retention function of mangrove forests to enhanced agroecosystem production. Wetlands Ecology & Manage 16(6): 441–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerbauer J and Ardon C (1999) Land use dynamics and landscape change pattern in a typical watershed in the hillside region of central Honduras Agric Ecosyst Environ 75(1): 93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kar SK and Bustard HR (1986). Status of the saltwater Crocodile (Crocodylus porosus, Schneider) in the Bhitarkanika wildlife sanctuary, Orissa, India. J of Bombay Natural History Society 86: 140–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Karthiresan K, Murthy P and Ravikumar S (1995) Studies on root growth of a tropical mangrove tree species. International Tree Crops Journal 8(2–3): 183–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause G, Bock M, Weirs S and Braun G (2004). Mapping land-cover and mangrove structures with remote sensing techniques: A contribution to a synoptic GIS in support of coastal management in North Brazil. Environmental Management 34(3): 429–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurthy K, Choudhury A and Untawale AG (1987). Status report, Mangroves in India, Ministry of Environment and Forests. New Delhi: Govt. of India

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam N (1983). Spatial interpolation methods: a review. The American Cartographer 10(2): 129–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson P, Freudenberger M and Wyckoff-Baird B (1998) WWF Integrated Conservation and Development Projects: Ten Lessons from the Field 1985–1996. World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis RR (2000) Ecologically based goal setting in mangrove forest and tidal marsh restoration in Florida. Ecol Eng 15: 191–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K and Marks BJ (1995) FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-351. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 122 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Menon S and Bawa KS (1997) Applications of geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing and a landscape ecology approach to biodiversity conservation in the Western Ghats. Current Science 73(2): 134–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller JN, Brooks RP and Croonquist MJ (1997) Effects of landscape patterns on biotic communities. Landscape Ecology 12(3): 137–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millington AC, Velez-Liendo XM and Bradley AV (2003) Scale dependence in multitemporal mapping of forest fragmentation in Bolivia: implication for explaining temporal trends in landscape ecology and applications to biodiversity conservation. J Photo Rem Sens 57(4): 289–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra R (1968) Ecology Workbook. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moloney KA and Levin SA (1996) The effects of disturbance architecture on landscape-level population dynamics. Ecology 77(2): 375–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muttitanon W and Tripathi NK (2005). Land use/land cover changes in the coastal zone of Ban Don Bay, Thailand using Landsat TM data. Int J Remote Sens 26(11): 231–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C and Grelsson G (1995) The fragility of ecosystems: a review. Journal of Applied Eco 32(4): 677–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norussis MJ (1994) SPSS professional statistics Version 8.0. Chicago, Illinois: SPSS Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSSO (1997) Energy used by Indian Households. National Sample Survey Organization, Department of Statistics, New Delhi. Report No. 410/2

  • O’Neill RV, Krummel JR, Gardner RH, Sugihara G, Jackson B, DeAngelis DL, Milne BT, Turner MG, Zygmunt B, Christensen SW, Dale VH and Graham RL (1988) ndices of landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology. 1(3): 153–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Foppen R, Reijnen R. and Schotman A (1995) The landscape ecologist approach to in bird conservation: integrating the metapopulation concept into spatial planning. Ibis 137(1): 139–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandav B (1997) Birds of Bhitarkanika mangroves, Eastern India. Forktail. 12(1): 9–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Patnaik MR, Purohit KL and Patra AK (1995). Mangrove swamps of Bhitarkanika Orissa, India — A great eco habitat for wildlife. Cheetal 34(1): 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto L (1987) Environmental factors influencing the occurrence of juvenile fish in the mangroves of Pagbilae, Philippines. Hydrobiologia 150(3): 283–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prance GT, Balee W, Boom BM and Carnerio RL (1987) Quantitative ethnobotany and the case for conservation in Amazonia. Conservation Biology 1(4): 296–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primavera JH and Agbayani RF (1997) Comparative strategies in community-based mangrove rehabilitation programmes in the Philippines. In: Hong PN, Ishwaran N, San HT, Tri NH, Tuan MS (eds), Proceedings of Ecotone V, Community Participation in Conservation, Sustainable Use and Rehabilitation of Mangroves in Southeast Asia, UNESCO, Japanese Man and the Biosphere National Committee and Mangrove Ecosystem Research Centre, Vietnam. pp. 229–243

  • Ramachandran S, Sundramoorthy S, Krishnamoorthy R, Devasenpathy J and Thanikachalam M (1998) Application of remote sensing and GIS to coastal wetland ecology of Tamil Nadu and Andaman and Nicobar group of islands with special reference to mangroves. Current Science 75(3): 236–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravan SA and Roy PS (2000). Landscape level characterization of biological rich forest sitesutility of remote sensing and spatial analysis tools. Asian Journal of Geoinformatics 1(2): 11–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Romme WH and Knight DH (1982) Landscape diversity: the concept applied to Yellowstone Park. Bioscience 32(8): 664–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy PS. (1989) Mangrove vegetation stratification using Salyut 7 photographs. Geocarto International 4: 31–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy PS and Behera MD (2002) Biodiversity assessment at landscape level. Tropical Ecology 43(1): 151–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy PS, Padalia H, Chauhan N, Porwal MC, Gupta S, Biswas S and Jagdale R (2005). Validation of Geospatial model for Biodiversity characterisation at landscape level — a study in Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India. Ecological Modeling 185(24): 349–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy PS and Tomar S (2000). Biodiversity characterization at landscape level using Geospatial Modeling Technique. Biological Conservation 95(1): 95–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saenger P (2002) Mangrove Ecology, Silviculture and Conservation. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Saenger P, Hegerl EJ and Davie JDS (1983) Global Status of Mangrove Ecosystems. Commission on Ecology Papers No. 3. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayre R, Roca E and Sedaghatkish G (2000) Nature in Focus: Rapid Ecological Assessment. Washington DC: Island Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott DA (1989) A Directory of Asian Wetlands. IUCN, Cambridge, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2001) Sustainable Management of Non-Timber Forest Resources. Montreal, SCBD, (CBD Technical Series no. 6), pp. 30

    Google Scholar 

  • Selvam V (2003) Environmental classification of mangrove wetlands of India. Current Science 84(6): 757–765

    Google Scholar 

  • Spalding M, Blasco F and Field C eds. (1997) World Mangrove Atlas. International Society for Mangrove Ecosystems, Okinawa, Japan

  • Spaninks F and van Beukering P (1997) Economic Valuation of Mangrove Ecosystems: Potential and Limitations. CREED Working Paper Series 14. London, UK: IIED

    Google Scholar 

  • State of Forest Report (2001) Forest Survey of India. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Dehra Dun, Government of India

  • Turner MG (1989) Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20: 171–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valiela I, Bowen JL and York JK (2001) Mangrove forests: one of the world’s threatened major tropical environments. BioScience 51(10): 807–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Laake PE and Sanchez-Azofeifa GA (2004) Focus on deforestation: zooming in on hot spots in highly fragmented ecosystems in Costa Rica. Agric Ecosyst Environ 102(1): 3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters BB (2004) Local management of mangrove forests: effective conservation or efficient resource exploitation? Hum Ecol 32(2): 177–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters BB, Ronnback P, Kovacs JM, Crona B, Hussain SA, Badola R, Primavera JH, Barbier E and Dahdouh-Guebas F (2008) Ethnobiology, socioeconomics and management of mangrove forests: a review. Aquatic Botany 89(2): 220–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White PS and Pickett STA (1985) Natural disturbances and patch dynamics: an introduction. In STA Pickett and PS White (eds), 1985. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics, pp. 3–13. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkie DS, Shaw E, Rotberg F, Morelli G and Auzel P (2000) Roads, development and conservation in the Congo Basin. Conservation Biology 14(6): 1614–1622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams M (1991) Wetlands: A Threatened Landscape. Basil Blackwell, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Zharikov Y, Skilleter GA, Loneragan NR, Taranto T and Cameron BE (2005). Mapping and characterizing subtropical estuarine landscapes using aerial photography and GIS for potential application in wildlife conservation and management. Biological Conservation 125(1): 87–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wildlife Institute of India, Post Box # 18, Dehra Dun., 248003, Uttarakhand, India

    K. R. Ambastha, S. A. Hussain & R. Badola

  2. National Remote Sensing Centre, Balanagar, Hyderabad, 500625, India

    P. S. Roy

Authors
  1. K. R. Ambastha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. A. Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Badola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. S. Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. A. Hussain.

About this article

Cite this article

Ambastha, K.R., Hussain, S.A., Badola, R. et al. Spatial analysis of anthropogenic disturbances in mangrove forests of Bhitarkanika Conservation Area, India. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 38, 67–83 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-010-0013-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-010-0013-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation